A Question Of My Own For Joshuak And Anyone Else Interested

[Dr T]

Hello,

Sorry to intrude on your conversation. I'm wondering your comment AK

...it's one thing for Jesus to say being baptized is fulfilling all righteousness...

when did Jesus say that?

Thank you

[Ray]

I just wanted to say I love EVERYONE here...

... and I do enjoy learning ABOUT ALL OF YOU!!!

[Outshined]

I just wanted to say I love EVERYONE here...

... and I do enjoy learning ABOUT ALL OF YOU!!!

Right back atcha, homey!

[Princess3dward]

<div class='quotemain'>

I just wanted to say I love EVERYONE here...

... and I do enjoy learning ABOUT ALL OF YOU!!!

Right back atcha, homey!

You too Ray!

And I would PM you but I have no clue how, so I will say here.

I miss spell EVERYTHING!

Thank you for the correction!

[Guest ApostleKnight]

Here you go Dr. T, not just the scripture involving Jesus's teaching, but all three I mentioned:

Matthew 3:14-15

14 But John forbad [Jesus], saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me?

15 And Jesus answering said unto [John], Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffered him.

Acts 2:36-38, 40

36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.

37 Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?

38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

40 And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation.

Romans 10:9

9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

[mdb]

Well my point is, Joshua, that if "Mormons" are saved by Jesus just like all other Christians, why do you concern yourself so much with our beliefs? I mean if we're harmlessly over-zealous, what's the big deal?

The problem isn't with being over-zealous. It is good to be zealous for God. The problem is with the doctrine. The Scripture speak of those who follow after false doctrines and those who lead others astray by the same.

Regarding Jesus and doctrine, the Scriptures also say:

For if he who comes preaches another Jesus whom we have not preached, or if you receive a different spirit which you have not received, or a different gospel which you have not accepted—you may well put up with it! (2 Cor 11:4)

But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed. (Gal 1:8)

I think that we would all agree that only the true Jesus Christ can sent the Holy Spirit. If you believe in a Jesus Christ who is not the Jesus of the bible, then you do not have the Holy Spirit in you and you are not saved. This is where the problem lies: in the doctrine which is taught you. The LDS teaches a Jesus Christ who was a created man on another world who attained a status of Godhood, that He is now the God of this world and that you should strive to attain the same. You are taught that Jesus is the literal brother of the devil and not his creator. You say Jesus created this world, but not all things.

The Scriptures teach none of this, it's false doctrine, and you follow it to your own destruction. As the Scriptures say, "you believe in one God. Good, so do devils and shudder." Because you say that you believe in Jesus and claim to have an indwelling of the Spirit, and pray to God does not make you a follower of the true Jesus Christ.

It's a long weekend here. I'm going home.

[Princess3dward]

<div class='quotemain'>

Well my point is, Joshua, that if "Mormons" are saved by Jesus just like all other Christians, why do you concern yourself so much with our beliefs? I mean if we're harmlessly over-zealous, what's the big deal?

The problem isn't with being over-zealous. It is good to be zealous for God. The problem is with the doctrine. The Scripture speak of those who follow after false doctrines and those who lead others astray by the same.

Regarding Jesus and doctrine, the Scriptures also say:

For if he who comes preaches another Jesus whom we have not preached, or if you receive a different spirit which you have not received, or a different gospel which you have not accepted—you may well put up with it! (2 Cor 11:4)

But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed. (Gal 1:8)

I think that we would all agree that only the true Jesus Christ can sent the Holy Spirit. If you believe in a Jesus Christ who is not the Jesus of the bible, then you do not have the Holy Spirit in you and you are not saved. This is where the problem lies: in the doctrine which is taught you. The LDS teaches a Jesus Christ who was a created man on another world who attained a status of Godhood, that He is now the God of this world and that you should strive to attain the same. You are taught that Jesus is the literal brother of the devil and not his creator. You say Jesus created this world, but not all things.

The Scriptures teach none of this, it's false doctrine, and you follow it to your own destruction. As the Scriptures say, "you believe in one God. Good, so do devils and shudder." Because you say that you believe in Jesus and claim to have an indwelling of the Spirit, and pray to God does not make you a follower of the true Jesus Christ.

It's a long weekend here. I'm going home.

I read the through, and was going to comment on each thing you said individually, but, instead.... I realize, there is not much to be said.

All I can say is the spirit professes the truth, and therefore there was no truth in your statements.

I didn't feel the spirit at all while reading this.

I feel the spirit with church doctrine, and even doctrine at other churches that happen to be true, like Jesus is the Son of God, and that we are all sons and daughters...

Have you ever felt the spirit?

[Ray]

ApostleKnight: Well my point is, Joshua, that if "Mormons" are saved by Jesus just like all other Christians, why do you concern yourself so much with our beliefs? I mean if we're harmlessly over-zealous, what's the big deal?

mdb: The problem isn't with being over-zealous. It is good to be zealous for God. The problem is with the doctrine

I can see that. I agree. What's the problem.

mdb: The Scripture speak...

Oops, wait a minute. Sorry to interupt.

The "scriptures" don't actually speak.

The scriptures are words that were written by men, and God CAN inspire men to write now.

Can you tell me who you're quoting from now???

How about this?

some men who wrote some words through inspiration from God spoke...

... of those who follow after false doctrines and those who lead others astray by the same.

Is that okay? Good. What's your point?

mdb: Regarding Jesus and doctrine, the Scriptures also say...

Oops. There we go again.

I think you meant: Regarding Jesus and doctrine, a man named Paul once said:

mdb: For if he who comes preaches another Jesus whom we have not preached, or if you receive a different spirit which you have not received, or a different gospel which you have not accepted—you may well put up with it! (2 Cor 11:4)

But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed. (Gal 1:8)

I think that we would all agree that only the true Jesus Christ can sent the Holy Spirit.

Okay. Yes. I think all of us would. I know I certainly do.

mdb: If you believe in a Jesus Christ who is not the Jesus of the bible, then you do not have the Holy Spirit in you and you are not saved.

Yeah. Okay. I can agree with that too, if by "Jesus of the bible" you're referring to the person referred to in the Holy Bible by many people who really knew who He was, and now is.

mdb: This is where the problem lies: in the doctrine which is taught you.

Okay. So you're saying there is or at least can be a problem with doctrine that is being taught.

Yeah. Okay. I agree with that.

mdb: The LDS teaches...

I think you either mean the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints teaches

OR

People you know who are members of (the church named above) who call themselves "LDS" teach:

mdb: a Jesus Christ who was a created man on another world who attained a status of Godhood

Hmmm. Okay, You must be referring to certain members of the above named church, instead of the Church as an organization, because that is not what the Church teaches. The Church (named above) teaches that Jesus Christ, who was once born on this Earth in a small town named Bethlehem, lived a long, long time before He ever came here to be born on this Earth to a woman named Mary, and that before He was born here He was living on another world instead of just floating around in space above our planet.

Oh, yeah, and He had already become like our Father in heaven.

Anyway, again, sorry to interrupt. I'll now quote the other thoughts that you were teaching us.

mdb: ...that He <Jesus Christ> is now the God of this world and that you should strive to attain the same.

Yes. He is now the God of this world we live on, and we can become like Him through the Atonement.

mdb: You are taught that Jesus is the literal brother of the devil and not his creator.

Yes. That is right. Satan was not created by Jesus. Satan was created by our Father in heaven... and when Satan was born he was good.

mdb: You say Jesus created this world, but not all things.

Heh, actually He created all "things" on this world... but the "things" do not include all the "people".

And yes, He didn't create our Father in heaven. Our Father created all of us, or the "people".

But we can be created as a NEW creature through Him. And when we are, Jesus Christ is then our Father... ALSO.

mdb: The Scriptures teach none of this.

I think you really mean the "Holy Bible" teaches none of this. But even then you're still wrong about that.

There are many things that I've said which are mentioned in the Bible, but some other things are also taught in other scriptures.

mdb: ...it's false doctrine...

Says who???

YOU???

Do you expect me to believe what you think???

I'm learning from God, and ALL of His prophets, and I suggest that you do that as best you can.

mdb: ... and you follow it to your own destruction.

Says YOU???

Who are YOU to tell US what is TRUE???

mdb: As the Scriptures say...

Uh, who said what???

mdb: ... you believe in one God. Good, so do devils and shudder."

References please. And I'd like to see all of your credentials.

mdb: Because you say that you believe in Jesus and claim to have an indwelling of the Spirit, and pray to God does not make you a follower of the true Jesus Christ.

Amen. I agree with all that. And who has said that I should follow what YOU are saying???

mdb: It's a long weekend here. I'm going home.

Get some good rest and I'll see you when I see you. :)

[Guest ApostleKnight]

mdb, I see your tune hasn't changed. LDS don't interpret the Bible the way you do; therefore, we are following "another gospel" and teaching "another Christ" and will be denied salvation for doing so.

Only time will tell if you're right...a lil' thing called Judgment Day. I won't bother to even draw my rapier, as theological fencing with you quickly becomes boring since you use the same lunge again and again...a lunge easily parried and hopelessly ineffectual.

Have a good weekend though, hope you get some rest. Sleep is everything.

[JoshuaFKon]

A.K, for once I agree with you,

Sleep is everything

Josh B)

[Guest ApostleKnight]

Josh, being a fellow student of political science I wondered what your take is on the practice of the New Testament apostles following Christ's resurrection, where they had all things in common etc... Do you see that as an inspired older brother to communism, or an early Christian error?

I'm not looking for a particular answer, nor do I have an agenda in asking this. Just curious about your political opinion. I read the quote by Churchill in your signature and that got me thinking.

[JoshuaFKon]

Josh, being a fellow student of political science I wondered what your take is on the practice of the New Testament apostles following Christ's resurrection, where they had all things in common etc... Do you see that as an inspired older brother to communism, or an early Christian error?

I'm not looking for a particular answer, nor do I have an agenda in asking this. Just curious about your political opinion. I read the quote by Churchill in your signature and that got me thinking.

Funny you should mention that...I have had the same thought about that verse myself

I have three veiws on this.

(1) It was completely voluntary

(2) They were an extremely small community

(3) and it isn't a command, or even recomended...it just tells you want they did.

I would have to say an early christian error.

I'd love to hear what you're take on that verse is though...

josh B)

[Guest ApostleKnight]

Your observations reduce the practice to its essential elements. I agree. I think that when properly administrated and followed, the principle below is a noble one:

"From each according to their ability; to each according to their need."

Of course socialism and communism are founded on the fallacy that having equal possessions guarantees equal happiness. Or stated conversely, being poor is the cause of misery.

The LDS Church tried something called the "united order" in Joseph Smith's day and discontinued it once settled in Utah. People's desire for private possessions and "fancy" possessions signalled the end of that practice in my opinion.

As I recall, a town in Utah had among its rules one that said men could only get new pants when their old ones were worn out. Well some boys from the town visited a more "capitalistic" town and grew envious of the boys there and their newer, fancier pants. So their pants suddenly got holes in the knees and they got new pants, but a little investigation discovered that they were rubbing their pants on a millstone or something to make them worn out so they could get new pants sooner. And thus ended the united order in one of the last towns to practice it.

(If I got anything wrong in the story, please anyone with documentation, correct me...I kinda' gave a condensed "gist of the story" account)

[JoshuaFKon]

As I recall, a town in Utah had among its rules one that said men could only get new pants when their old ones were worn out. Well some boys from the town visited a more "capitalistic" town and grew envious of the boys there and their newer, fancier pants. So their pants suddenly got holes in the knees and they got new pants, but a little investigation discovered that they were rubbing their pants on a millstone or something to make them worn out so they could get new pants sooner. And thus ended the united order.

lol...good story. :)

Yes...communism just dosen't work....even if tried out of the best of intentions....

Josh B)

[prisonchaplain]

PC, you've said this often, and I've often wondered what you base this belief on. I mean, it's one thing for Jesus to say being baptized is fulfilling all righteousness, and for Peter to preach on Pentecost to repent and be baptized and receive the Holy Ghost, and for Paul to say accepting Christ as our Savior is necessary for salvation...but where does it say that the saved Christian must grow in wisdom and works to be saved?

Jesus says that if you love him you'll obey his commands. The Great Commission includes the command to "teach them all that I have instructed you." If you love someone you get to know them in every way possible.

This thing we call salvation seems so simple. And yet, we are told that on the day of judgment some will claim to have done great works in Jesus' name, and He'll say He never knew them.

So, on the one hand, it's possible to have the intellectual stuff right, but to never know him personally. At the same time, it's possible to have a sincere passion, such that great deeds are done, and yet not to have known him personally.

So, my contention is that if we would guard our salvation, we should seek to know Jesus with our hearts, our heads, and our hands.

[prisonchaplain]

Josh, being a fellow student of political science I wondered what your take is on the practice of the New Testament apostles following Christ's resurrection, where they had all things in common etc... Do you see that as an inspired older brother to communism, or an early Christian error?

I'm not looking for a particular answer, nor do I have an agenda in asking this. Just curious about your political opinion. I read the quote by Churchill in your signature and that got me thinking.

Funny you should mention that...I have had the same thought about that verse myself

I have three veiws on this.

(1) It was completely voluntary

(2) They were an extremely small community

(3) and it isn't a command, or even recomended...it just tells you want they did.

I would have to say an early christian error.

I'd love to hear what you're take on that verse is though...

josh B)

I wanna play too, since I studied political studies in college. My take: The Christians were a small, persecuted community, and it only made sense to pull together and share what they had. I don't see a pattern or model being established for the church universal to follow here.

[Dr T]

Thank you A.K. for the passages. I will look at them (prob. tomorrow) :)

Thanks again,

Dr. T

[boyando]

<div class='quotemain'>

Josh, being a fellow student of political science I wondered what your take is on the practice of the New Testament apostles following Christ's resurrection, where they had all things in common etc... Do you see that as an inspired older brother to communism, or an early Christian error?

I'm not looking for a particular answer, nor do I have an agenda in asking this. Just curious about your political opinion. I read the quote by Churchill in your signature and that got me thinking.

Funny you should mention that...I have had the same thought about that verse myself

I have three veiws on this.

(1) It was completely voluntary

(2) They were an extremely small community

(3) and it isn't a command, or even recomended...it just tells you want they did.

I would have to say an early christian error.

I'd love to hear what you're take on that verse is though...

josh B)

I wanna play too, since I studied political studies in college. My take: The Christians were a small, persecuted community, and it only made sense to pull together and share what they had. I don't see a pattern or model being established for the church universal to follow here.

I do not know why, but I have been thinking alot about the early Saints, having all things in commen, also. My take is a little different-

Hold on, cause I'm going to shock you with my view - In the Millennium, we will live a form of communism. The communism that we know today, has one fatal error. It is run by men and God is left out of the equation.

Although, what we call the United order has been tried several time's, and failed, it is practiced by the General Authority's of the LDS Church, today, with great success.

The LDS Welfare system is a watered down version of the unitited order, were those who need assistance, and can work, have opportunity's to work for the help they need. If they can not work, they are still taken care of.

It is still not a perfect system, because of the human factor. The Bishop of each ward, along with the Relief Society president, sit down and determine the needs of each family. Most of the time that works out great. I while back, I was a secretary to the Bishop in my ward, and he got a letter from the leader's of welfare system in our area, that he shared with me and other's.

The short verson of the letter kind of said this - people who are in need of assistance, need more than the bare minimum. The cows on the Church's welfare farms, produce both hamberger and steak. The steaks are stacking up and we are running short on hamberger. Please consider, not only the needs, but the desire of those who need assistance. My Bishop, repented.

I know it was not a commandment to join in, but didn't God strike a Couple dead for saying that they gave all, when they sold there property, but kept some of the money? I will have to go back and re-read Acts.

Any way, those of you who are of a conservative, political, persuasion, don't worry about me. I have never seen communism or socialism benenit men. It always turns out to be a power grab.

Thanks for being there and allowing me to ramble - Allmosthumble

[Dr T]

Anytime Almosthumble :)

[pushka]

I do wish people would stop dissing socialism...as opposed to Communism as practised in Russia and China.

Socialism itself is an ideal situation, when people are allowed to choose to live that way, indeed it is only corruption within those governing the law that causes/caused it to fail.

In the UK there are various Lets groups who practise socialism in part...exchanging skills and goods with other members of the scheme, there are no arguments about members of the scheme having more goods/food/clothing than others, everybody's needs are met as far as possible, when requests are made. Luxury goods/services are exchanged as well as basic ones, and mainly everybody is happy with the scheme. This is the kind of socialism that I would like to see in practise.

[Princess3dward]

I do wish people would stop dissing socialism...as opposed to Communism as practised in Russia and China.

Socialism itself is an ideal situation, when people are allowed to choose to live that way, indeed it is only corruption within those governing the law that causes/caused it to fail.

In the UK there are various Lets groups who practise socialism in part...exchanging skills and goods with other members of the scheme, there are no arguments about members of the scheme having more goods/food/clothing than others, everybody's needs are met as far as possible, when requests are made. Luxury goods/services are exchanged as well as basic ones, and mainly everybody is happy with the scheme. This is the kind of socialism that I would like to see in practise.

Each culture is different, and how they are raised ofcourse effects how they react to changes around them, like government.. Not only would that be a huge change, but it would not work in our culture.

People like owning stuff too much.

[JoshuaFKon]

Socialism itself is an ideal situation, when people are allowed to choose to live that way, indeed it is only corruption within those governing the law that causes/caused it to fail.

First of all, it is the system of government which allowed them to become corrupt and stay in power...

Secondly, it was not just the corruption that was horrible, it was also the economy, without prices to let the manufatuers know how much was needed...you get 50,000 buttons and 25,000 shirts, the whole "central planing" was and is a complete faliure!

I recomend reading, Basic Economics by Thomas Sowell

In the UK there are various Lets groups who practise socialism in part...exchanging skills and goods with other members of the scheme, there are no arguments about members of the scheme having more goods/food/clothing than others, everybody's needs are met as far as possible, when requests are made. Luxury goods/services are exchanged as well as basic ones, and mainly everybody is happy with the scheme. This is the kind of socialism that I would like to see in practise.

It could never work on a large scale.

Josh B)

[pushka]

Hi Desire and Joshua...thanks for your comments, thanks also for the recommended reading.

I forgot to include the fact that within the Lets scheme the goods/skills are exchanged freely, without cost to anybody!!

I do agree that it would be very difficult, although perhaps not impossible, to run on a large scale.

[JoshuaFKon]

I do agree that it would be very difficult, although perhaps not impossible, to run on a large scale.

You're welcome, :) and its not that it would be "impossible" to run...it just wouldn't work near as well...

I think one on my favorite quotes sums it up pretty well...

The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of the blessings. The inherent blessing of socialism is the equal sharing of misery. – Winston Churchill

Josh B)

[pushka]

Perhaps that was true in the Russia of old...'The inherent blessing of socialism is the equal sharing of misery.' – Winston Churchill

but I would like to hope that it may be different now :)